SavedAdd your journal

Journals / International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education / 2025 / Volume: 12 Issue: 4

From addiction to pervasiveness: Validation of the Smartphone Pervasiveness Scale in Turkish adolescents

Osman Urfa(MİLLİ EĞİTİM BAKANLIĞI BURDUR)0000-0002-9821-671X
Recep Görgülü(BURSA ULUDAG UNIVERSITY)0000-0003-2590-4893
Pages
—
Publication Date
2025-12-05
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In conclusion, the Turkish version of the SPS is a valid and reliable instrument for assessing the pervasiveness of smartphone use among Turkish adolescents.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The present study aimed to adapt the Smartphone Pervasiveness Scale (SPS) into Turkish and to examine its psychometric properties among Turkish adolescents.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Study 1 explored the factor structure of the SPS through exploratory factor analysis (EFA), using data collected from 216 adolescents (Mage = 14.50, SD = 1.55).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In conclusion, the Turkish version of the SPS is a valid and reliable instrument for assessing the pervasiveness of smartphone use among Turkish adolescents.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Smartphone pervasiveness · Problematic smartphone use · Smartphone addiction

Abstract

The present study aimed to adapt the Smartphone Pervasiveness Scale (SPS) into Turkish and to examine its psychometric properties among Turkish adolescents. To this end, two studies were conducted. Study 1 explored the factor structure of the SPS through exploratory factor analysis (EFA), using data collected from 216 adolescents (Mage = 14.50, SD = 1.55). Study 2 employed confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) with multi-group analysis (MGA) on a separate sample of 314 adolescents (Mage = 13.87, SD = 2.10) to confirm the factor structure of the SPS and to assess measurement invariance across gender. In addition, Study 2 examined the associations between SPS scores and several external variables—problematic smartphone use, well-being, loneliness, psychological distress, and academic performance—as evidence of criterion-related validity. In both studies, Cronbach's alpha and composite reliability (CR) coefficients were calculated to assess reliability. EFA results in Study 1 supported a 7-item, single-factor structure, with factor loadings ranging from .46 to .67. CFA results in Study 2 confirmed this structure. Measurement invariance across gender was supported by the MGA. Moreover, criterion-related validity was demonstrated in Study 2: SPS scores were positively correlated with problematic smartphone use, loneliness, and psychological distress, and negatively correlated with well-being and academic performance. In both studies, Cronbach's alpha and CR coefficients were observed at .71 or higher. In conclusion, the Turkish version of the SPS is a valid and reliable instrument for assessing the pervasiveness of smartphone use among Turkish adolescents.

🔖

Cite This Article

Urfa, O., Görgülü, R. (2025). From addiction to pervasiveness: Validation of the Smartphone Pervasiveness Scale in Turkish adolescents. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, Volume: 12 Issue: 4. https://doi.org/10.21449/ijate.1579992

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (49)

  1. American Psychiatric Association (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-IV-TR. American Psychiatric Association.
  2. Beaton, D.E., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F., & Ferraz, M.B. (2000). Guidelines for the process of cross cultural adaptation of self report measures. Spine, 25(24), 3186 3191. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014
  3. Bozkurt, A., Demirdöğen, E.Y., & Akıncı, M.A. (2024). The association between bedtime procrastination, sleep quality, and problematic smartphone use in adolescents: A mediation analysis. The Eurasian Journal of Medicine, 56(1), 69 75. https://doi.org/10.5152/eurasianjmed.2024.23379
  4. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2012). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı [Handbook of data analysis for the social sciences]. Pegem Akademi.
  5. Cai, Z., Mao, P., Wang, Z., Wang, D., He, J., & Fan, X. (2023). Associations between problematic internet use and mental health outcomes of students: A meta-analytic review. Adolescent Research Review, 8(1), 45–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40894-022-00201-9
  6. Chakraborty, S., Gui, M., Gerosa, T., & Marciano, L. (2024). Testing the validity of the smartphone pervasiveness scale for adolescents with self-reported objective smartphone use data. Digital Health, 10. https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076241234744
  7. Chen, F.F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 14(3), 464 504. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701301834
  8. Cheung, G.W., & Rensvold, R.B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233 255. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5
  9. Clark, L., & Limbrick-Oldfield, E.H. (2013). Disordered gambling: a behavioral addiction. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 23, 655 659. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.conb.2013.01.004
  10. DeVellis, R.F. (2017). Scale development: Theory and applications (4th ed.). Sage.
  11. Eser, E., Çevik, C., Baydur, H., Güneş, S., Esgin, T.A., Öztekin, Ç., Eker, E., Gümüşsoy, U., Eser, G.B., & Özyurt, B. (2019). Reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the WHO-5, in adults and older adults for its use in primary care settings. Primary Health Care Research ve Development, 20(e100), 1 7. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1463423619000343
  12. Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03193146
  13. Field, A., Miles, J., & Field, Z. (2012). Discovering statistics using R. Sage.
  14. Gana, K., & Broc, G. (2019). Structural equation modeling with lavaan. John Wiley & Sons.
  15. Gerosa, T., Gui, M., & Büchi, M. (2022). Smartphone use and academic performance: a pervasiveness approach beyond addiction. Social Science Computer Review, 40(6), 1542–1561. https://doi.org/10.1177/08944393211018969
  16. Goldberg, D.P. (1972). Detecting psychiatric illness by questionnaire. Oxford University Press.
  17. Goldberg, D.P. (1978). Manual of the General Health Questionnaire. NFER-Nelson.
  18. Gui, M., & Gerosa, T. (2021). Smartphone pervasiveness in youth daily life as a new form of digital inequality. In E. Hargittai (Ed.), The handbook of digital inequality (pp. 131–147). Edward Elgar Publishing.
  19. Gui, M., Gerosa, T., Garavaglia, A., Petti, L., & Fasoli, M. (2018). Digital well-being. Validation of a digital media education programme in high schools. Report. Research Center on Quality of Life in the Digital Society. University of Milano Bicocca.
  20. Gül, H., Fırat, S., Sertçelik, M., Gül, A., Gürel, Y., & Kılıç, B.G. (2019). Cyberbullying among a clinical adolescent sample in Turkey: effects of problematic smartphone use, psychiatric symptoms, and emotion regulation difficulties. Psychiatry and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 29(4), 547–557. https://doi.org/10.1080/24750573.2018.1472923
  21. Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., & Anderson, R.E. (2014). Multivariate data analysis. Pearson.
  22. Hair, J.F., Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C.M., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). SAGE Publications.
  23. Hays, R.D., & DiMatteo, M.R. (1987). A short-form measure of loneliness. Journal of Personality Assessment, 51, 69–81. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa5101_6
  24. Horn, J.L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30, 179–185.
  25. Hu, L., & Bentler, P.M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
  26. Jääskeläinen, R. (2012). Think-aloud protocol. In Y. Gambier & L. Doorslaer (Eds.), Handbook of translation studies: Volume 1 (pp. 371–373). John Benjamins.
  27. Jeong, K.H., Kim, S., Ryu, J.H., & Lee, S. (2024). A longitudinal relationship between mother’s smartphone addiction to child’s smartphone addiction. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 22(4), 1771–1782. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-022-00957-0
  28. Kabadayı, F. (2024). The examination of the relationship between irrational beliefs, depression, anxiety, stress and internet addiction in emerging adults. Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli Üniversitesi SBE Dergisi, 14(3), 1645 1667. https://doi.org/10.30783/nevsosbilen.1514229
  29. Kılıç, C. (1996). Genel Sağlık Anketi: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması [General Health Questionnaire: Validity and reliability study]. Türk Psikiyatri Dergisi, 7(1), 3–11.
  30. Kline, R.B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford Publications.
  31. Korkmaz, S., Goksuluk, D., & Zararsiz, G. (2014). MVN: An R package for assessing multivariate normality. The R Journal, 6(2), 151–62.
  32. Kwon, M., Kim, D.J., Cho, H., & Yang, S. (2013b). The smartphone addiction scale: Development and validation of a short version for adolescents. PLoS ONE, 8(12). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0083558
  33. Kwon, M., Lee, J.Y., Won, W.Y., Park, J.W., Min, J.A., Hahn, C., Gu, X., Choi, J.H., & Kim, D.J. (2013a). Development and validation of a Smartphone Addiction Scale (SAS). PLoS ONE, 8(2). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0056936
  34. Lin, Y.H., Lin, S.H., Yang, C.C.H., & Kuo, T.B.J (2017). Psychopathology of everyday life in the 21st century: Smartphone addiction. In C. Montag (Ed.), Internet addiction: neuroscientific approaches and therapeutical implications including smartphone addiction (pp. 339–358). Springer.
  35. Mahapatra, S. (2019). Smartphone addiction and associated consequences: Role of loneliness and self regulation. Behaviour & Information Technology, 38(8), 833 844. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2018.1560499
  36. Mascheroni, G., & Olafsson, K. (2016). The mobile Internet: Access, use, opportunities and divides among European children. New Media & Society, 18(8), 1657 1679. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448145679
  37. Olson, J.A., Sandra, D.A., Colucci, E.S., Bikaii, A.A., Chmoulevitch, D., Nahas, J., Raz, A., & Veissiere, S.P.L. (2022). Smartphone addiction is increasing across the world: A meta-analysis of 24 countries. Computers in Human Behavior, 129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.107138
  38. Panova, T., & Carbonell, X. (2018). Is smartphone addiction really an addiction?. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 7(2), 252–259. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.7.2018.49
  39. Samaha, M., & Hawi, N.S. (2016). Relationships among smartphone addiction, stress, academic performance, and satisfaction with life. Computers in Human Behavior, 57, 321–325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.12.045
  40. Shahidin, S.H., Midin, M., Sidi, H., Choy, C.L., Nik Jaafar, N.R., Mohd Salleh Sahimi, H., & Che Roos, N.A. (2022). The relationship between emotion regulation (ER) and problematic smartphone use (PSU): A systematic review and meta-analyses. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(23). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192315848
  41. Sohn, S.Y., Rees, P., Wildridge, B., Kalk, N.J., & Carter, B. (2019). Prevalence of problematic smartphone usage and associated mental health outcomes amongst children and young people: a systematic review, meta-analysis and GRADE of the evidence. BMC Psychiatry, 19(356). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-019-2350-x
  42. Squires, L.R., Hollett, K.B., Hesson, J., & Harris, N. (2021). Psychological distress, emotion dysregulation, and coping behaviour: A theoretical perspective of problematic smartphone use. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 19(4), 1284–1299. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00224-0
  43. Steinberg, L. (2022). Adolescence. McGraw Hill.
  44. Şata, M., & Karip, F. (2017). Turkish culture adaptation of Smartphone Addiction Scale-short version for adolescents. Cumhuriyet International Journal of Education, 6(4), 426–440. https://doi.org/10.30703/cije.346614
  45. TÜİK (2024). Çocuklarda bilişim teknolojileri kullanım araştırması, 2024 [Information technology usage survey in children, 2024]. https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Cocuklarda-Bilisim-Teknolojileri-Kullanim-Arastirmasi-2024-53638
  46. Urfa, O. (2024). A conditional process model to explain problematic smartphone use: The interaction among frustration intolerance, duration of use, and gender. Psihologija, 57(2), 215-226. https://doi.org/10.2298/PSI220627017U
  47. van der Schuur, W.A., Baumgartner, S.E., Sumter, S.R., & Valkenburg, P.M. (2015). The consequences of media multitasking for youth: A review. Computers in Human Behavior, 53, 204–215. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.06.035
  48. WHO (1998). Wellbeing measures in primary health care/the depcare project. WHO Regional Office for Europe: Copenhagen.
  49. Yıldız, M.A., & Duy, B. (2014). Adaptation of the short-form of the UCLA Loneliness Scale (ULS-8) to Turkish for the adolescents. Düşünen Adam the Journal of Psychiatry and Neurological Sciences, 27, 194–203. https://doi.org/10.5350/DAJPN2014270302